Deut. 21:12 provides that if an Israelite wants to marry a woman captured in war, the captured woman must shave her head.

Yesterday I was reading Euripides' The Trojan Women, which is a 5th century BC Greek play. It is about what happened to the women and children after the fall of Troy (the men were executed). Anyway, the female war prisoners had their heads shaved. This reminded me of the rule for war brides in Deut, although the shaving was not just for brides but all female slaves.

Anyway, does anyone know if this was a broader cultural practice?

Scott

__________________
Scott Roberts
Ruling Elder, Lakeside Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Southlake, Texas

Possibly to discourage men from finding them sexually alluring ? Or maybe as a sign of mourning ?

Good question. I am going to research this further.

__________________
Misery induces despair, pride induces presumption. The Incarnation shows man the
greatness of his misery by the greatness of the remedy which he required.
~ Pascal, Pensees 526

Speculation -

If what Paul says that a woman's hair is representative of the male's headship - after a war with all of the men being killed - it would show that a female was headship-less. Both father and husband for that matter.

Not sure if this is it, but it makes sense to me.

__________________
Chris Rhoades -33
Good Shepherd Presbyterian Church (PCA) Nashville, TN-Under Care

Vera theologia non theoretica, sed practica est; Finis siquidem eius agere est hoc est vitam vivere deiformem. - Martin Bucer
""True theology is not theoretical, but practical. The end of it is living, that is to live a godly life."

That would tie in with the idea of shame as well Chris. Interesting.

me thinks you hit the nail on the head.

__________________
~Keon Garraway~ Brooklyn, NY Member of Franklin Square OPC

Love for God demonstrated by the love for our children in giving them a God centered education is the only hope for our country. by David Morrow
Pslam 71:20 [Thou], which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and shalt bring me up again from the depths of the earth.

Same passage talks about cutting her nails. Just like kosher law had a spiritual and a natural sense, so did this. In the physical sense, this kept lice and other varments from speading to the Israelites.

On the mourning front: this is true. Jewish Commentary says that the captive woman remained in the home of her captor for a period of time, during this time, the time of her mourning she looked quite unattractive, so that he may lose interest in her and set her free.

__________________
Beth Montgomery
Wife to Steve,mom of Benjamin and John, Graduate Whitefield Theological Seminary



Blog: Journeying for Him

Tolle Lege, Tolle Lege!

This seems confusing...

Beth, if the point of the law was to encourage the man to lose interest and set her free, why did 21:11 allow the israelites to take captives as wives in the first place? Also, verse 11 specifically states that the reason the men took the women as wives was because they desired her for her beauty.

Regarding the idea of headship, if the israelite man was going to take her as a wife wouldn't that mean she would have a new head now? Making it strange to ask her to shave for that purpose.

The idea that comes to my mind instinctively was that the actions the woman took seemed to indicate some kind of breaking with her past. But that's just a guess off course...

__________________
Mark
Independent baptist
Singapore

Ok, in Euripides, it appears to be done for grief and is self-imposed. Hecuba, the deceased Priam's wife, says: "Oh that I should sit here o'er against the tent of Agamemnon Forth from my home to slavery they hale my aged frame, while from my head in piteous wise the hair is shorn for grief."

Also Hecuba later says: "All these have I seen slain by the spear of Hellas, and at their tombs have I shorn off my hair; with these my eyes I saw their sire, my Priam, butchered on his own hearth, and my city captured, nor did others bring this bitter news to me."

As the Greek practice is self-imposed it seems to differ from the Deut. passage, which seems to require a man taking the bride to see that it is done.


[Edited on 10-27-2005 by Scott]

I have a guess to posit:

Perhaps it was to differentiate these pagan women from among the Israelite women, and also, to give special honor to the Israelite women that gave them more esteem in their husbands eyes than these "new" women. This way the newly captured brides didn't overrun or replace the Israelite women. God was being faithful/merciful to His covenant women.

__________________
Christopher Hinton
Northland, A Church Distributed;
Altamonte Springs, FL

Understand.
Let me quote first a Rabbi (fwiw) and then Jamisson Fausset and Brown Commentary:

Rashi basically makes the same point as you do Mark,:
The treatment of women under ancient Israelite law was at least better than the way they were treated in surrounding cultures. Rashi points out that even if the law forbade Israelite men from marrying captive women, they would do it anyway. Therefore, the Torah sets limits. We must realize that being taken as a wife is most likely a far better fate than that awaiting the other female captives. The text, then, is actually protecting women legally, given the circumstances. It insists that an Israelite man follow a prescribed process that acknowledges the captive women's loss of her previous life. Rather than simply raping her, he must consider her future: "She shall be your wife. Then, should you no longer want her, you must release her outright. You must not sell her for money: Since you had your will of her, you must not enslave her." (Deuteronomy 21:13-14)

Jamiesson Fausset and Brown state:

When thou goest to war . . . and seest among the captives a beautiful woman . . . that thou wouldest have her to thy wife--According to the war customs of all ancient nations, a female captive became the slave of the victor, who had the sole and unchallengeable control of right to her person. Moses improved this existing usage by special regulations on the subject. He enacted that, in the event that her master was captivated by her beauty and contemplated a marriage with her, a month should be allowed to elapse, during which her perturbed feelings might be calmed, her mind reconciled to her altered condition, and she might bewail the loss of her parents, now to her the same as dead. A month was the usual period of mourning with the Jews, and the circumstances mentioned here were the signs of grief--the shaving of the head, the allowing the nails to grow uncut, the putting off her gorgeous dress in which ladies, on the eve of being captured, arrayed themselves to be the more attractive to their captors.

**The delay was full of humanity and kindness to the female slave, as well as a prudential measure to try the strength of her master's affections. If his love should afterwards cool and he become indifferent to her person, he was not to lord it over her, neither to sell her in the slave market, nor retain her in a subordinate condition in his house; but she was to be free to go where her inclinations led her. **

My guess re Deut. is that as Satz says it is that she is breaking from her past. She is becoming a new creation of sorts.

Thank you, Beth. That does make sense. The Jewish ppl had restrictions on how servants, slaves, and various relations were to be treated and handled.

__________________
JC
URCNA
PA, but homesick for SC

"Who says you can't go back, been all around the world and as a matter of fact. There's only one place left I want to go, who says you can't go home" Bon Jovi